-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
Customize the PML to account for beam path in non vacuum material #34
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Draft
amorimd
wants to merge
16
commits into
ImpedanCEI:main
Choose a base branch
from
amorimd:customize-pml
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Besides the number of PML cells, the resistivity boundaries, permittivity and the function used to compute the resistivity profile in the PML are now arguments for the SolverFIT3D
To make the init clearer, the PML parameters are given default values within the initialization. To customize the values for PML resistivity ans eps, user can access the attributes and re-execute fill_pml_sigmas to update the PML cells.
This first attempt uses the properties of the central cell of the layer adjacent to the PML, assuming the beam is centered
Relaxation times were incorrect when sigma=0 in the simulation space, as the whole PML had sigma=0
… cases other than vacuum The sigma for the PML layers is now the sigma of the previous non-PML layer + the function of resistivity. This function starts from the sigma value of the layer if it is non zero, or from a low sigma value
This is to improve field absorption, in particular if we have vacuum. One might need more layers of PML then
…ion time computation
This still needs to be worked out, as there are some divergence in computations
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
📝 Pull Request Summary
The PML is modified to allow customization of the conductivity function and to match the properties of the last layer for$\sigma$ and $\epsilon_r$
🔧 Changes Made
To Do
✅ Checklist
docs/or included inexamples/andnotebooks/)📌 Related Issues / PRs
Related to feature request #33